On abortion philosophy

The journal's reply to Mr. Fischer accurately pointed out that the journal had been misquoted but the addition of the word "human" to the journal's statement fails to alter the comments unless it is incorrectly maintained that the unborn child is not a biologically distinct entity or he or she is a member of another species. Consequently, Fischer's conclusions remain valid and unaddressed by the journal's response. The only exception that this writer would take to Fischer is his assertion that the pro-abortion-on-demand movement claims to have an internally consistent philosophy. In the final analysis, the crux of the matter is neither biological accuracy nor internal consistency. The basic question is whether 1 human being ever has the right to define and the inherent ability to discern the personhood of another human being. If the response is affirmative, then everyone, rather than the pregnant female only, should be permitted the right to determine whether another live human being is a "subperson" eligible for euthanasia. All individual human beings have an unalienable right to life and must be granted personhood until a scientific technique which can measure the abstract qualities of humanity is developed

Abortion · Assertion · Consistency (knowledge bases) · Epistemology · Humanity · Personhood · Political science · Pregnancy · Statement (logic) · Computer Science · Law · Philosophy · Psychology · Reproductive Health and Technologies